Which individuals and organizations have been indicted for funding or supporting January 6 organizers?

1. Who has been criminally indicted for organizing or conspiring around Jan. 6 — the headline names

Federal indictments have explicitly targeted individuals at the center of the planning and execution narratives: Special Counsel Jack Smith’s Washington indictment charged Donald Trump with multiple counts alleging a scheme to overturn the 2020 election and to exploit the January 6 disruption — an indictment the press and legal analysts treated as alleging an orchestrated conspiracy ^{[1] [5]}. Separately, five Proud Boys leaders — Enrique Tarrio, Joseph Biggs, Zachary Rehl, Ethan Nordean and Dominic Pezzola — were indicted on seditious-conspiracy counts in June 2022; most were convicted months later ^[2].

2. Indictments vs. “support” or “funding”: legal reach is narrower than political narratives

The indictments cited emphasize acts like conspiracy, obstruction and sedition for individuals who allegedly coordinated or led violent or obstructive actions ^{[2] [1]}. Available legal filings and reporting in these sources focus on criminal conduct and scheming, not on broad civil fundraising or partisan donations. That distinction matters because groups or donors who paid for rallies, transportation, or security are not automatically criminally liable unless the funding can be tied to a criminal plot — the sources do not document criminal indictments of donors who financed the Jan. 6 rally per se ^{[3] [4]}.

3. Funders and nonprofits named in reporting and committee probes

Congressional investigation and open reporting identified organizations and donors who financed parts of the January 6 activity: Roger Stone’s “Stop The Steal Security Project” raised funds for staging, transportation and security, and reporting names Julie Fancelli — an heiress identified as a major donor who budgeted millions for related events — while other nonprofits such as Women for America First and the Rule of Law Defense Fund have been connected to pre‑Jan. 6 mobilization ^{[3] [4]}. These sources document financial involvement and organizational roles but do not equate those payments with criminal indictments in the materials provided ^{[3] [4]}.

4. Unnamed or unindicted co‑conspirators and legal advisers

Trump’s Washington indictment references unnamed “co‑conspirators” and attorneys alleged to have aided the scheme; reporting and analysis name likely figures (e.g., John Eastman, Kenneth Chesebro, Rudy Giuliani appear in investigative accounts and related probes), and prosecutors listed several unnamed co‑conspirators in filings ^{[6] [7]}. Such designations mean prosecutors believe other actors contributed, but the available sources show some remained unindicted in the Justice Department filings referenced here ^{[6] [7]}.

5. The challenge of tracing “dark money” and attribution

Senator Sheldon Whitehouse and advocacy groups warned that dark‑money channels and 501(c)^[8] groups obscured who financed political mobilization; he argued disclosure rules and enforcement gaps make it difficult to follow funds that may have helped assemble the crowd that marched to the Capitol ^[4]. The Brennan Center and other analyses similarly note big donors who supported election‑denial networks and later political activity, but emphasize that full donor lists and legal culpability are often hidden or legally complex ^{[9] [4]}.

6. What the sources do not say or do not resolve

Available reporting in these documents does not provide a comprehensive list of every person or organization criminally indicted specifically for "funding" or "supporting" Jan. 6 organizers; instead, they document criminal charges for plotting and leadership (Trump and Proud Boys leaders) and separate reporting that identifies financial backers and organizations involved in event logistics ^{[1] [2] [3] [4]}. The sources do not claim that all named donors or groups were criminally charged for providing money ^{[3] [4]}.

7. Competing framings and political context

Legal and political actors disagree on whether fundraising or organizational support equates to criminal responsibility. Prosecutors prioritized charging those alleged to have conspired to obstruct the election and lead violent action ^{[1] [2]}. Meanwhile, congressional critics and some lawmakers emphasize the role of dark money and nonprofit mobilization in enabling the event; their remedies focus on disclosure and enforcement rather than criminal prosecutions as described in these sources ^[4].

Bottom line

Records in the cited reporting show clear criminal indictments for several leaders and for the principal defendant in the Washington case, while separate reporting and committee work identify donors and organizations that financed rallies and logistics — but the sources do not document widespread criminal indictments solely for funding Jan. 6 organizers. Where sources name funders, they document financial involvement; where sources list indictments, they emphasize alleged conspiratorial acts ^{[2] [1] [3] [4]}.